government in the bedroom
But here's my question: where is the conservative GOP outrage over government intrusion into the bedroom? Exhibit A: Virginia. In Virginia, it is illegal for non-married adults to have consensual vaginal sex. In Virginia, it is illegal for merchants to sell vibrators. In Virginia, it is even illegal for married adults to talk dirty on the telephone. (Does that apply to dirty texts or dirty email on an iPhone?)
The classic defense of these appalling laws is that they are never enforced, therefore they do no harm. But if they are never enforced, that ought to be reason enough to repeal them!
TV pundits have pointed out that GOP candidate Ken Cuccinelli's anti-sodomy crusade was weird enough to doom his candidacy for governor. (How else could a corrupt sleaze like Terry McAuliffe become governor?) The GOP establishment was perhaps embarrassed by Cuccinelli's strange obsession, but if they were embarrassed, they were silent about it. No such silence when it comes to Mayor Bloomberg's authoritarian soda pop laws, so why the double standard?
Liberals believe that you should be able to do whatever you want with your body.....unless you want to put trans fats into it.
So it works both ways...
Quote: Beethoven9thYou must be a liberal because a conservative can easily flip the argument around and say: Where is the liberal outrage over government intrusion with our bodies? Exhibit A: Abortion.
Liberals believe that you should be able to do whatever you want with your body.....unless you want to put trans fats into it.
So it works both ways...
you should be able to do whatever you want with your body.
Quote: Beethoven9thYou must be a liberal because a conservative can easily flip the argument around and say: Where is the liberal outrage over government intrusion with our bodies? Exhibit A: Abortion.
Liberals believe that you should be able to do whatever you want with your body.....unless you want to put trans fats into it.
So it works both ways...
Beethoven,
This is a false comparison. The government does not force anyone to have abortions. The GOP wants to take the choice away from individuals whether to have one, and in many states, they have done just that. In Virginia, the GOP was literally forcing government intrusion into women's bodies (rape with an object) with medically unnecessary procedures like trans-vaginal ultrasounds for their own agendae. It's a very similar interference to the laws the OP is referencing, and enacted for essentially the same reason; that some people in this country think they should get to tell other people how to live their private lives. It's really very hypocritical for the GOP to claim that they're for smaller government and less regulation, and yet continually push these invasive laws on others.
Nobody passes laws because they want to stop themselves from behavior they don't like; they pass laws to stop other people from doing something they don't like. Somehow it's not enough to mind their own business and follow their own ethics, lead by example, express their disapproval. No, they want to put the force of law behind their personal beliefs and opinions, and make us all pay the taxes to enforce it. I call bullshit.
You just proved that it's not a false comparison. Liberals support 'choice' when it comes to abortion, yet they don't support 'choice' at all when it comes to trans fats.Quote: beachbumbabsThis is a false comparison. The government does not force anyone to have abortions. The GOP wants to take the choice away from individuals whether to have one, and in many states, they have done just that.
It would hypocritical if the GOP stood for no government. The GOP advocates limited government, and (rightly or wrongly) they believe that defending the unborn is a valid function of that small government.Quote: beachbumbabsIt's really very hypocritical for the GOP to claim that they're for smaller government and less regulation, and yet continually push these invasive laws on others.
This is what liberals are doing with trans fats.Quote: beachbumbabsNobody passes laws because they want to stop themselves from behavior they don't like; they pass laws to stop other people from doing something they don't like.
Quote: beachbumbabs
Nobody passes laws because they want to stop themselves from behavior they don't like; they pass laws to stop other people from doing something they don't like. Somehow it's not enough to mind their own business and follow their own ethics, lead by example, express their disapproval. No, they want to put the force of law behind their personal beliefs and opinions, .
+1
Quote: terapinedyou should be able to do whatever you want with your body.
So you oppose the ban on trans fats? If so, props for being consistent.
Quote: Beethoven9thYou must be a liberal because a conservative can easily flip the argument around and say: Where is the liberal outrage over government intrusion with our bodies? Exhibit A: Abortion.
Liberals believe that you should be able to do whatever you want with your body.....unless you want to put trans fats into it.
So it works both ways...
Defining yourself as being the opposite of someone else is a poor choice. Define your position well, and it doesn't matter what the 'liberals' want to do.
Quote: Beethoven9thSo you oppose the ban on trans fats? If so, props for being consistent.
I didn't vote in your poll because, well, WTF are trans fats? never really looked into it so kind of ignorrant on the subject. No interest in reading a bunch of dry boring science. But off hand without looking into this, I'm kind of leaning toward your view on this.
OMG, I agreed with B9 lol.
Anyway, on to another point, If the govt knew what I smoked every nite :-) , I could be doing some hard time so yea, count me in on the "you should be able to do whatever you want with your body" comment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans_fat#Presence_in_foodQuote: terapinedI didn't vote in your poll because, well, WTF are trans fats?
Quote: thecesspitDefining yourself as being the opposite of someone else is a poor choice. Define your position well, and it doesn't matter what the 'liberals' want to do.
I didn't define myself as the 'opposite' of anyone else. The OP presented an argument, and I simply pointed out that a conservative can use the same type of argument against him.
Quote: Beethoven9thhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans_fat#Presence_in_food
Wow, thats a huge article and some real dry reading.
Hmm, limited time and I like to read, but i like to read for entertainment. I do read to educate myself, but only if the subject is presented in an entertaining way. So tough decision, read the Wiki article or move on to the next WOV thread. Actually not so tough, moving on to next thread but thanks for the link to the article.
Quote: terapinedWow, thats a huge article and some real dry reading.
Hmm, limited time and I like to read, but i like to read for entertainment. I do read to educate myself, but only if the subject is presented in an entertaining way. So tough decision, read the Wiki article or move on to the next WOV thread. Actually not so tough, moving on to next thread but thans for the link to the article.
Trans fats are a by-product of processing food. Unlike the "good fats", they clog shit up and raise all the bad stuff like cholesterol and whatnot. This is the stuff that clogs your arteries and makes your ticker stop ticking.
Not entertaining, but at least I made it short =p
Quote: reno
But here's my question: where is the conservative GOP outrage over government intrusion into the bedroom? Exhibit A: Virginia. In Virginia, it is illegal for non-married adults to have consensual vaginal sex. In Virginia, it is illegal for merchants to sell vibrators. In Virginia, it is even illegal for married adults to talk dirty on the telephone. (Does that apply to dirty texts or dirty email on an iPhone?)
These laws more fall in line with their beliefs?
As for the first one, I figure this is a dated one that just hasn't been bothered to taken off the books by either party. As for the vibrator thing, sex toys are illegal in Georgia too, but if you slap a sticker saying "Novelty Use Only", then voila, they can be sold. So dumb.
Quote: FaceTrans fats are a by-product of processing food. Unlike the "good fats", they clog shit up and raise all the bad stuff like cholesterol and whatnot. This is the stuff that clogs your arteries and makes your ticker stop ticking.
Not entertaining, but at least I made it short =p
That was pretty easy reading. Thanks for the cliff notes version.
Quote: beachbumbabsSomehow it's not enough to mind their own business and follow their own ethics
You mean like the Lib's now forcing everybody to
buy health insurance whether they want it or not?
How is that 'minding their own business', by making
people do something they don't want to do?
Quote: Beethoven9thThis is what liberals are doing with trans fats.
I'm not a fan of these ridiculous soda pop/trans fat laws, but I'll play devil's advocate: the food laws regulate a form commerce. Mayor Bloomberg's soda pop ban applied only to businesses; the serving size of soda pop in your own private kitchen at home was not mentioned in Mayor Bloomberg's law. (Needless to say, it was still a crappy law.)
There is a parallel between Bloomberg's soda law and Virginia's vibrator ban, because both regulate commerce. But Virginia's anti-fornication law has nothing to do with commerce. That purpose of the fornication law is to criminalize intimacy between consenting adults in private bedrooms. It's perfectly acceptiable that Sarah Palin is outraged by a 16 ounce limit on Pepsi, but I'm wondering why conservatives like her are silent on laws forcing mandatory celibacy on unmarried adults.
LOL...I like your honesty, man. :DQuote: terapinedWow, thats a huge article and some real dry reading.
Hmm, limited time and I like to read, but i like to read for entertainment. I do read to educate myself, but only if the subject is presented in an entertaining way. So tough decision, read the Wiki article or move on to the next WOV thread. Actually not so tough, moving on to next thread but thanks for the link to the article.
Anyway, I don't want to get too off-topic here, but here are a couple of relevant articles:
1. Trans-Fat Ban: Would You Even Notice a Difference?
2. Five foods that face changes with trans-fat ban
No need to play devil's advocate. Since you oppose the trans fat ban and all of those other ridiculous bans, then you're consistent, and I do respect that.Quote: renoI'm not a fan of these ridiculous soda pop/trans fat laws, but I'll play devil's advocate: [snip]
+1Quote: EvenBobYou mean like the Lib's now forcing everybody to
buy health insurance whether they want it or not?
How is that 'minding their own business', by making
people do something they don't want to do?
Quote: renoI'm not a fan of these ridiculous soda pop/trans fat laws, but I'll play devil's advocate: the food laws regulate a form commerce. Mayor Bloomberg's soda pop ban applied only to businesses; the serving size of soda pop in your own private kitchen at home was not mentioned in Mayor Bloomberg's law. (Needless to say, it was still a crappy law.)
There is a parallel between Bloomberg's soda law and Virginia's vibrator ban, because both regulate commerce. But Virginia's anti-fornication law has nothing to do with commerce. That purpose of the fornication law is to criminalize intimacy between consenting adults in private bedrooms. It's perfectly acceptiable that Sarah Palin is outraged by a 16 ounce limit on Pepsi, but I'm wondering why conservatives like her are silent on laws forcing mandatory celibacy on unmarried adults.
Conservatives use the same playbook as scientology, dont defend the undefendable, allways attack.
Take B9 , his response to the hypocrisy is not defend, attack
Quote: B9
You must be a liberal because a conservative can easily flip the argument around and say: Where is the liberal outrage over government intrusion with our bodies? Exhibit A: Abortion.
Liberals believe that you should be able to do whatever you want with your body.....unless you want to put trans fats into it.
So it works both ways...
See, he's not going to defend the undefendable, ridiculous sodomy laws, and say you are right, hes gonna attack.
Quote: Beethoven9thYou must be a liberal because a conservative can easily flip the argument around and say: Where is the liberal outrage over government intrusion with our bodies? Exhibit A: Abortion.
Actually, i may be wrong in trying to figure where B9 is coming from, such as the above statement.
Huh, Libs want dont want govt in our lives when it comes to abortion, Libs are fine with no gvt intrusion, let doc and patient decide.
You got me confused B9. please clarify above statement.
It's pretty simple. Conservatives can flip the hypocrisy argument around and throw it right back at libs. For example:
LIBERAL: Conservatives are hypocrites because they want to ban ABC, yet they don't want to ban XYZ.
CONSERVATIVES: Liberals are hypocrites because they want to ban XYZ, yet they don't want to ban ABC.
So basically, liberals like this are just as hypocritical as they claim conservatives to be.
(NOTE: The OP stated that he opposes the bans on trans fats, soda, etc., so he's not a hypocrite at all on this issue.)
Quote: BuzzardLast month Cuccinelli asked the United States Supreme Court to rule that consensual oral and anal sex between gay and heterosexual couples be re-criminalized because he considers them crimes against nature.
I would consider Cuccinelli a crime against nature. Nice that Virginia voters agreed.
Quote: renoI'm sympathetic to the conservative GOP argument that governments shouldn't enact intrusive laws policing what we eat: trans fat bans, soda pop size limits, sugar taxes, etc.
But here's my question: where is the conservative GOP outrage over government intrusion into the bedroom? Exhibit A: Virginia. In Virginia, it is illegal for non-married adults to have consensual vaginal sex. In Virginia, it is illegal for merchants to sell vibrators. In Virginia, it is even illegal for married adults to talk dirty on the telephone. (Does that apply to dirty texts or dirty email on an iPhone?)
There's a link discussing both liberals and conservative views. Excerpt:
Quote:Moreover, conservatives are quite willing to employ the power of the law to ensure that the pursuit of pleasure is kept within bounds. They advocate tax policies that favor families, laws preventing same-sex unions, making divorce and abortion more difficult, restrictions on the sale of contraceptives to minors, even harsh laws on teenage sex.
http://distributistreview.com/mag/2012/05/the-contradictions-of-liberals-and-conservatives/
There isn't one side that is absolutely correct and the other side always hypocritical.
Quote: BuzzardGee whiz, I must be a sissy after all. What a straight line ? DAMN
Dare you. Double dare you. No, I double-dog dare you. Just open your mouth, stick out your tongue, and lean right up against that frozen flagpole. Tastee-freeze, indeed.
Potty mouth !
Quote: Buzzard. This is a family oriented forum.
Brady Bunch or the Manson Family?
Quote: Beethoven9th^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
It's pretty simple. Conservatives can flip the hypocrisy argument around and throw it right back at libs. For example:
LIBERAL: Conservatives are hypocrites because they want to ban ABC, yet they don't want to ban XYZ.
CONSERVATIVES: Liberals are hypocrites because they want to ban XYZ, yet they don't want to ban ABC.
So basically, liberals like this are just as hypocritical as they claim conservatives to be.
(NOTE: The OP stated that he opposes the bans on trans fats, soda, etc., so he's not a hypocrite at all on this issue.)
Absolutely, hypoprocy on both sides but I still dont undersand where you are coming from in this statement.
Quote: Beethoven9th
You must be a liberal because a conservative can easily flip the argument around and say: Where is the liberal outrage over government intrusion with our bodies? Exhibit A: Abortion.
Keep the govt out of out doc/patient decisions. Thats a lib view that should also be a conservative view.
Quote: terapinedAbsolutely, hypoprocy on both sides but I still dont undersand where you are coming from in this statement.Quote: Beethoven9thLIBERAL: Conservatives are hypocrites because they want to ban ABC, yet they don't want to ban XYZ.
CONSERVATIVES: Liberals are hypocrites because they want to ban XYZ, yet they don't want to ban ABC.
What's so hard to understand? You even quoted my explanation. The OP's statement was like the first. I pointed out the someone else could easily make the second statement and claim hypocrisy the other way. And since he attacked conservatives, I stated that he's a liberal.
It's all pretty self-explanatory, so I don't see what the issue is.
They call it legislation.Quote: beachbumbabs
Nobody passes laws because they want to stop themselves from behavior they don't like; they pass laws to stop other people from doing something they don't like. Somehow it's not enough to mind their own business and follow their own ethics, lead by example, express their disapproval. No, they want to put the force of law behind their personal beliefs and opinions, and make us all pay the taxes to enforce it. I call bullshit.
Not only are vibrators viewed as illegal but recordings by Steely Dan must be re-named. I think its often attributed to Mark Twain... nothing needs reform more than the bad habits of others.
The problem is when those bad habits have direct and immediate and rather substantial costs.
Motorcycle helmets, snowmobiling, skateboarding, ........the Nanny State may want to regulate vitamin doses but its hardly an immediate cost to take a mega dose of vitamin C. Some other activities impose medical costs. Abortions have probably been the primary factor in reducing crime.
Quote: Beethoven9thWhat's so hard to understand? You even quoted my explanation. The OP's statement was like the first. I pointed out the someone else could easily make the second statement and claim hypocrisy the other way. And since he attacked conservatives, I stated that he's a liberal.
It's all pretty self-explanatory, so I don't see what the issue is.
I meant the statement below not above, again, I am confused by this BELOW.
Quote: Beethoven9th
You must be a liberal because a conservative can easily flip the argument around and say: Where is the liberal outrage over government intrusion with our bodies? Exhibit A: Abortion..
Its the liberal view that gvt should not get involved in any Dr/Patient discussions.
Hmm, I went back and its no longer there. Actually its there but changed. Edit due to a misspoken statement?
Edit- my error, above statement incorrect, B9 response is there unchanged.
Quote: BuzzardLast month Cuccinelli asked the United States Supreme Court to rule that consensual oral and anal sex between gay and heterosexual couples be re-criminalized because he considers them crimes against nature.
Surely Cuccinelli must be a liberal ?
What isn't there? The lines you quoted are still where I originally posted them. In any case, I still don't understand why you're having such difficulty understand what I'm saying.Quote: terapinedHmm, I went back and its no longer there. Actually its there but changed. Edit due to a misspoken statement?
That's not the argument I was addressing. I specifically cited the "freedom of choice" argument. There are many, many, many, many, many, many liberals out there who use the "choice" argument to justify abortion. (Probably because it sounds so persuasive & makes for a good sound bite) For liberals who use an alternative argument, what I said doesn't apply to them.Quote: terapinedIts the liberal view that gvt should not get involved in any Dr/Patient discussions.
Quote: kewljGovernment in the bedroom....is that who that guy is sitting there night after night watching me sleep? I've been wondering who he was and what he was up to. Now I know...just uncle Sammy. :-)
Look closer, that's Michael Bloomberg watching you…..
